On 12/09/17 15:58, Gedare Bloom wrote:
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Sebastian Huber
<sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
On 11/09/17 16:03, Sebastian Huber wrote:
----- Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> schrieb:
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Sebastian Huber <
sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
Ok, but why do you think that this is an error? We can share the
synchronization objects among processes.
We don't have processes. How do you propose to share between
processes when RTEMS is fundamentally a single process system.
Yes, its a single process system. So, it is very easy to support sharing
between processes. Why should creating a process-shared synchronization
object fail only because its impossible to create a second process?
I would like to remove this process-shared error also from the other POSIX
synchronization objects:
https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3125
https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3126
Do these process-shared synch objects work properly when used in a
single process on *nix?
Yes, this is why I referred to the POSIX mutex documentation:
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/pthread_mutexattr_getpshared.html
See also follow up (2.9.9 Synchronization Object Copies and Alternative
Mappings):
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/V2_chap02.html#tag_15_09_09
Which explicitly mentions semaphores.
--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
PGP : Public key available on request.
Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
